|
|
Post by Volleyhorns on Aug 14, 2024 2:03:40 GMT -5
Being dead serious, if you have two incredible opposites and great setters such as we, If Madi and Akana can control our ball control does anyone think a 6’2 can win a national championship or is there not enough stability throughout, opinions? This doesn’t just mean Texas if anyone can pull it off does it work ? tbh I’m not as opposed as I was months ago, as I’ve said a couple times I think. my pros and cons list pros: • takes pressure off of the two new middle blockers blocking wise AND offensively • would be able to use our strongest six servers (not sure what combo of Carlson/Swindle/Whitney has the best serves but we could leave Whitney/Swindle in that extra half rotation so Whitney could serve and Ella will be more than fine at the net if it’s them two) • our blocking would be much better than it would be if Carlson was a 5-1 setter • takes offensive pressure off of Jenna cons: • instability in sets • we lose the ability to free Madi to have a full head of steam on her bics in serve receive as she will HAVE to pass 6ro • Akana gets moved to middle back instead of right back which we haven’t really seen her play much of before • could be occasional sub issues but we have a luxury because I’m comfortable with Jenna, Carlson, and Rutherford playing 6ro in an absolute pinch like that • when the hell was the last time a 6-2 won a natty lol can people think of other pros and cons other than those lol the only other con would be since swindle is a bit younger and if we get stuck doing this in future years she could get frustrated especially if our 6’2 isn’t as good as it would be this year. Say with Devin playing for Rutherford next year. Yeah just worried about how much akana can handle passing wise, if you watch the games she’s used as a secondary setter not a passer as much tbh |
|
|
|
Post by madithekuntress on Aug 14, 2024 2:23:18 GMT -5
my volleytalk identity has now been fully realized. in madi eggleston we trust
|
|
|
|
Post by hornfanaustin on Aug 14, 2024 6:58:43 GMT -5
Boooo! This type of thing is exactly why I didn't want to join the $EC. We had to join either the SEC or the Big 10 or we risked losing relevancy and having a voice in the future of collegiate athletics. Giving up LHN was a sacrifice, but a needed one given where college athletics is heading. My opinion that no one will respond to (which means I may be wrong!) is that it was all football and recruiting. Football makes the most money for UT. The various coaches we've had cycle through here were losing kids to nearby SEC-schools (A&M, LSU) because the SEC's reputation was that it got players "more ready" for the NFL. And the old days of "Don't you want your parents to be able to drive to see your games?" no longer mattered once A&M jumped to the SEC.
Everyone talks about the bigger paycheck as being a part of the SEC. Just to be blunt, Texas didn't need the extra money because Texas already had a "special cut" as part of the Big12 and the LHN contract (to be fair, ESPN couldn't wait to be rid of that contract).
But that's just me, madman in the woods howling at the moon. (I'm NOT a fan of going to the SEC, but I'm a fan of UT football)
|
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Aug 14, 2024 7:06:16 GMT -5
the only other con would be since swindle is a bit younger and if we get stuck doing this in future years she could get frustrated especially if our 6’2 isn’t as good as it would be this year. Say with Devin playing for Rutherford next year. Yeah just worried about how much akana can handle passing wise, if you watch the games she’s used as a secondary setter not a passer as much tbh I mean Akana will still be passing 3ro like she has been in the past, she would just hopefully be covering a bit more court since we wouldn’t/won’t have a second DS but that would be the same in a 5-1 too. Emerick just isn’t ready to beat out Jenna back row. Wisconsin actually set a pretty good precedent in a 6-2 DS being a secondary setter with GG. I think Akana would have almost more opportunities and freedom setting from middle back in a 6-2 than she does now. |
|
|
|
Post by hornfanaustin on Aug 14, 2024 7:09:43 GMT -5
the only other con would be since swindle is a bit younger and if we get stuck doing this in future years she could get frustrated especially if our 6’2 isn’t as good as it would be this year. Say with Devin playing for Rutherford next year. Yeah just worried about how much akana can handle passing wise, if you watch the games she’s used as a secondary setter not a passer as much tbh I mean Akana will still be passing 3ro like she has been in the past, she would just hopefully be covering a bit more court since we wouldn’t/won’t have a second DS but that would be the same in a 5-1 too. Emerick just isn’t ready to beat out Jenna back row. Wisconsin actually set a pretty good precedent in a 6-2 DS being a secondary setter with GG. I think Akana would have almost more opportunities and freedom setting from middle back in a 6-2 than she does now. Hey, with the no-doubles rule change this year on the second pass, won't everyone turn out to be a decent setter and you don't need a 6-2?
|
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Aug 14, 2024 7:14:04 GMT -5
We had to join either the SEC or the Big 10 or we risked losing relevancy and having a voice in the future of collegiate athletics. Giving up LHN was a sacrifice, but a needed one given where college athletics is heading. My opinion that no one will respond to (which means I may be wrong!) is that it was all football and recruiting. Football makes the most money for UT. The various coaches we've had cycle through here were losing kids to nearby SEC-schools (A&M, LSU) because the SEC's reputation was that it got players "more ready" for the NFL. And the old days of "Don't you want your parents to be able to drive to see your games?" no longer mattered once A&M jumped to the SEC.
Everyone talks about the bigger paycheck as being a part of the SEC. Just to be blunt, Texas didn't need the extra money because Texas already had a "special cut" as part of the Big12 and the LHN contract (to be fair, ESPN couldn't wait to be rid of that contract).
But that's just me, madman in the woods howling at the moon. (I'm NOT a fan of going to the SEC, but I'm a fan of UT football)
Regarding annual revenue, we were being passed by SEC and B1G schools as their conference payouts were becoming increasingly greater than that of the Big 12. LHN money was stagnant each year. Our admin would have stayed put in Big 12 if taking a revenue pay cut was part of the deal in joining the SEC. I believe I read that since we are not receiving equal revenue sharing the first couple of years as new members in the SEC, ESPN is paying Texas to supplement that deficit. |
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Aug 14, 2024 7:15:23 GMT -5
I mean Akana will still be passing 3ro like she has been in the past, she would just hopefully be covering a bit more court since we wouldn’t/won’t have a second DS but that would be the same in a 5-1 too. Emerick just isn’t ready to beat out Jenna back row. Wisconsin actually set a pretty good precedent in a 6-2 DS being a secondary setter with GG. I think Akana would have almost more opportunities and freedom setting from middle back in a 6-2 than she does now. Hey, with the no-doubles rule change this year on the second pass, won't everyone turn out to be a decent setter and you don't need a 6-2?
first team in history to run a 7-0 (or would that be considered a 7-7?) |
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Aug 14, 2024 8:06:12 GMT -5
We had to join either the SEC or the Big 10 or we risked losing relevancy and having a voice in the future of collegiate athletics. Giving up LHN was a sacrifice, but a needed one given where college athletics is heading. My opinion that no one will respond to (which means I may be wrong!) is that it was all football and recruiting. Football makes the most money for UT. The various coaches we've had cycle through here were losing kids to nearby SEC-schools (A&M, LSU) because the SEC's reputation was that it got players "more ready" for the NFL. And the old days of "Don't you want your parents to be able to drive to see your games?" no longer mattered once A&M jumped to the SEC.
Everyone talks about the bigger paycheck as being a part of the SEC. Just to be blunt, Texas didn't need the extra money because Texas already had a "special cut" as part of the Big12 and the LHN contract (to be fair, ESPN couldn't wait to be rid of that contract).
But that's just me, madman in the woods howling at the moon. (I'm NOT a fan of going to the SEC, but I'm a fan of UT football)
I hate going to the SEC. But staying in the Big 12 was untenable. The idea it was about the money is laughable. The LHN contract was backloaded, so the money was going up every year, in addition to the Big 12 contract it’s a little more in the SEC, but it’s not the windfall it would be for other schools. ESPN signed Texas to that contract to keep them in the ESPN. Sure they were glad to get out of it - as long as Texas remained in the ESPN fold, which they did. But ESPN would not have been excited to get out of the contract if, for example, it meant Texas went over to Fox with the Big 10. Sure, football and recruiting played a big factor. Texas made a series of poor hires, combined with Mack Brown’s final years of ineffectiveness. Tom Herman’s recruiting fell off a cliff, and yea, successful pitch had become participating against better competition in the SEC. Texas had worked hard for decades to keep a wall uo in Texas with A&M to keep the SEC out of Texas in many ways. But A&M leaving broke that seal. Not that the SEC didn’t recruit out of Texas, but the floodgates opened up with the departure of A&M. Make no mistake, the architect of the move was Chairman of the board of regents, Kevin Eltife. He lead instrumental in the negotiations, particularly the secrecy and the timing of the negotiations. As a former member of the Texas legislature, he knew of the threats to the PUF upon UT’s departure and maneuvered the machinations in a way to maximize the legislature’s impotency. He’s a keen follower of the football program and recruiting, and the role SEC membership would play in that. But there was a bigger picture, too. The Big 12 was an albatross for where collegiate athletics was heading. Del Conte knew that. The commissioner was always trying to juggle the needs of the big athletic revenue schools of OU and Texas with the snaller revenue schools in the rest of the conference. It was impossible to be an advocate for both, and too often Texas found the commissioner’s office to be an inadequate advocate for their positions in the wider world. For example, Texas has long advocated for fully funding all athletic scholarships and doing away with all partial scholarship sports altogether. Well, this goes over like a lead balloon in other Big 12 circles who don’t have extra cash lying around simply looking for places to spend it. Both OU and Texas felt very frustrated at constantly being scheduled for the early kickoff window, because those are the two programs that generated the best ratings and that was one of the premier time slots for the TV contract. Those early kickoffs were bad for the fan experience, and bad for local businesses whose livelihood depended on the football fan bases for their economic success. The SEC is a much more powerful advocate for the positions Texas has in terms of the future of college athletics, with NIL and revenue sharing. If in the future college athletics competitive footprint shrinks even further, it’s still going to include the Big 10 and SEC in ways the Big 12 could conceivably be in the outside looking in for worst case scenarios. It was practically inevitable Texas was going to have to exit at one point or another. Better to rip the bandaid off, get the best deal possible, with a UT governor during the off year for the legislature, than be forced to do a deal from a weaker negotiating position with a strong governor with a bit of an anti Texas bias in one way or another. I loathe the SEC as a conference. I was always hoping we’d end up somehow in the Big 10. I think their academics are a better fit, and I simply don’t view those schools as the collection of sleaze bags I’ve always viewed the SEC. I also detest the cultish mentality of the SEC. My hope is the UT fan base continues to mock the overall tribal nature of the SEC. At the same time, I’m glad to be out of the Big 12. Ever since the 1984 Supreme Court decision that broke up the NCAA’s monopoly hold on TV negotiations Texas has been saddled with an affiliation with smaller and poorer public and private schools with smaller TV footprints. The Big 12 was a decent stopping place, but the departures of Nebraska, Missouri, Colorado, and A&M, along with the additions of TCU - who we were always trying to get away from in the first place, and certainly never felt like they added anything from a TV perspective - along with West Virginia, who we considered a horrible geographic fit - made the Big 12 feel like a dead man walking. I don’t know what’s going to happen to college sports. There’s going to be a reckoning ahead. The current economics are unsustainable, but there’s no effective countervailing force to stop it or even slow it down. Market forces are being driven by ego, not by profit and loss. And ego doesn’t have the same monetary guardrails sound financial prudence might. But I do know the membership in the SEC puts Texas in the healthiest position possible. And if I’m churlish and unappreciative about many aspects of SEC membership, I’m grateful for that. I’m glad to be out of the Big 12, whose biggest hope for the future is that it’s composed of schools who would do anything to leave the conference for the SEC or Big 10 if they could, but they’re not wanted. That’s not a good situation to be in for the long term, and thankfully Texas had the option not to stay in it, and took it. |
|
|
|
Post by mln59 on Aug 14, 2024 8:55:28 GMT -5
My opinion that no one will respond to (which means I may be wrong!) is that it was all football and recruiting. Football makes the most money for UT. The various coaches we've had cycle through here were losing kids to nearby SEC-schools (A&M, LSU) because the SEC's reputation was that it got players "more ready" for the NFL. And the old days of "Don't you want your parents to be able to drive to see your games?" no longer mattered once A&M jumped to the SEC.
Everyone talks about the bigger paycheck as being a part of the SEC. Just to be blunt, Texas didn't need the extra money because Texas already had a "special cut" as part of the Big12 and the LHN contract (to be fair, ESPN couldn't wait to be rid of that contract).
But that's just me, madman in the woods howling at the moon. (I'm NOT a fan of going to the SEC, but I'm a fan of UT football)
The idea it was about the money is laughable. Texas, and each of the SEC schools, is going to be paid a king's ransom in TV contract money now that Texas and ou have been added. i am willing to bet a fish sandwich from the restaurant of your choosing that money played a large role in the decision |
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Aug 14, 2024 9:20:45 GMT -5
The idea it was about the money is laughable. Texas, and each of the SEC schools, is going to be paid a king's ransom in TV contract money now that Texas and ou have been added. i am willing to bet a fish sandwich from the restaurant of your choosing that money played a large role in the decision By large role you mean what? It was at best third on the priority list. Money played a role in terms of future conference relevance, but monetarily Texas was going to be making money hand over fist regardless of conference affiliation. They’re leaving an extra $20 million per year on the table simply for giving up LHN before the contract expires. Not to mention they likely could have extorted even more from the Big 12 in their new contract for binding assurances to stay. It’s not the end all be all you’re making it out to be. If you’re convinced of it there’s nothing I’m going to say to change your mind, but it doesn’t make it any more true. What makes a huge difference is all the money going to the rest of the SEC schools, plus their giant football stadiums and big crowds. Texas is now in a conference with relatively rich athletic department peers, so the overall goals and vision for the future of college athletics is way more aligned. Conference riches is playing a huge role there. |
|
|
|
Post by eyeroll2021 on Aug 14, 2024 9:36:00 GMT -5
I mean Akana will still be passing 3ro like she has been in the past, she would just hopefully be covering a bit more court since we wouldn’t/won’t have a second DS but that would be the same in a 5-1 too. Emerick just isn’t ready to beat out Jenna back row. Wisconsin actually set a pretty good precedent in a 6-2 DS being a secondary setter with GG. I think Akana would have almost more opportunities and freedom setting from middle back in a 6-2 than she does now. Hey, with the no-doubles rule change this year on the second pass, won't everyone turn out to be a decent setter and you don't need a 6-2?
Uh, no. Eliminating calls on doubles doesn't impact location, tempo etc. |
|
|
|
Post by mrworm on Aug 14, 2024 11:45:42 GMT -5
Times are on the schedule now!
|
|
|
|
Post by mln59 on Aug 14, 2024 12:03:11 GMT -5
Times are on the schedule now! wednesday match at baylor starts at 8pm. hmmmmmm....haven't made that drive in awhile |
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Aug 14, 2024 13:07:10 GMT -5
My opinion that no one will respond to (which means I may be wrong!) is that it was all football and recruiting. Football makes the most money for UT. The various coaches we've had cycle through here were losing kids to nearby SEC-schools (A&M, LSU) because the SEC's reputation was that it got players "more ready" for the NFL. And the old days of "Don't you want your parents to be able to drive to see your games?" no longer mattered once A&M jumped to the SEC.
Everyone talks about the bigger paycheck as being a part of the SEC. Just to be blunt, Texas didn't need the extra money because Texas already had a "special cut" as part of the Big12 and the LHN contract (to be fair, ESPN couldn't wait to be rid of that contract).
But that's just me, madman in the woods howling at the moon. (I'm NOT a fan of going to the SEC, but I'm a fan of UT football)
Regarding annual revenue, we were being passed by SEC and B1G schools as their conference payouts were becoming increasingly greater than that of the Big 12. LHN money was stagnant each year. Our admin would have stayed put in Big 12 if taking a revenue pay cut was part of the deal in joining the SEC. I believe I read that since we are not receiving equal revenue sharing the first couple of years as new members in the SEC, ESPN is paying Texas to supplement that deficit. The LHN money was not stagnant. It was backloaded. The payments were going to be considerably higher towards the tail end of the contract. It’s also an unknown how much Texas could have received from a new Big 12 contract. The pay cut issue was as much as anything a negotiating chip. I mean, it was a sincere one, but all parties wanted this to happen. Texas making it clear a pay cut wasn’t going to happen or this move wasn’t going to happen meant that all parties worked hard to make sure it didn’t happen. But the move isn’t the financial bonanza people make it out to be. It will be. Especially since there’s zero chance Texas was ever getting the equivalent of the LHN deal again once it expired, but the timing of the move wasn’t based on money. It was based on Eltife being the chairman of the board of regents, recognizing this move needed to happen, and then negotiated it with the ideal timing so that Texas was the least vulnerable to legislative machinations. Which he did quite successfully. No one gives him enough credit for that publicly, but he’s not seeking it. And plenty of people acknowledge him privately. It was a bold move and the right move, and frankly, it couldn’t have gone any better for UT’s purposes. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Aug 14, 2024 13:21:55 GMT -5
Texas, and each of the SEC schools, is going to be paid a king's ransom in TV contract money now that Texas and ou have been added. i am willing to bet a fish sandwich from the restaurant of your choosing that money played a large role in the decision
Money played a role in terms of future conference relevance, but monetarily Texas was going to be making money hand over fist regardless of conference affiliation. They’re leaving an extra $20 million per year on the table simply for giving up LHN before the contract expires. Not to mention they likely could have extorted even more from the Big 12 in their new contract for binding assurances to stay. It’s not the end all be all you’re making it out to be. If you’re convinced of it there’s nothing I’m going to say to change your mind, but it doesn’t make it any more true. What makes a huge difference is all the money going to the rest of the SEC schools, plus their giant football stadiums and big crowds. Texas is now in a conference with relatively rich athletic department peers, so the overall goals and vision for the future of college athletics is way more aligned. Conference riches is playing a huge role there. Please provide a link to support that is a fact. Everything Texas does is driven by revenue whether it be short-term or long-term. |
|
